Buck and All,
Standard vs. Supports -
The IDX release today said this -
"Identix BioLogon Supports Novell's NDS eDirectory as a Biometric Component of Novell's Modular Authentication Service"
and
"Identix Inc. (AMEX:IDX - news), a worldwide leader in providing biometric authentication, security and identification solutions, announced that its complete line of BioLogon(TM) software and hardware supports the Novell Modular Authentication Service (NMAS), introduced here at the RSA Security Conference (Nasdaq:NOVL - news)."
and
"BioLogon client/server software is a biometric component that supports NMAS's multi-layer security system, designed to offer alternatives to password logon and system security authorization."
Notice in all three quotes from IDX the word "supports" is used.
++++++++++++++
Now let's look at the ESAF announcement. It says -
"SAF Module for Novell Modular Authentication Service (NMAS) Is Included In Novell's NMAS Release Package As A Standard Multi-Biometric Authentication Method"
and
"The SAF Module for NMAS provides a secure, multi-biometric method for authenticating users to Novell Directory Service© (NDS)©, and components of the SAF module will be included as standard features in both the NMAS Starter Pack, available now, and the Enterprise Edition, expected to be available in March."
Notice both quotes from ESAF use the word "standard".
+++++++++++++++
My question is, What's going on here? Is ESAF, in fact, the STANDARD for Novell's NMAS and IDX only supports it? Is ESAF going to get the lion's share of revenues from this application? Just where do we stand with this?
And I've read that ESAF uses our BioLogon as its biometric engine. Is this true? Can anyone support that with evidence? Because if ESAF does use our BioLogon then I won't feel as bad as I otherwise might.
Rick
|
